Talk:Dinasia Prime
spelling of name The gives the name of the planet as Dynasia and the later name for the Iconian descendants as Dynasians, as in, a "y" and one "s". I don't know where the other two spelling variations come from. Since User:Syk99, who stated elsewhere that he wanted to focus on adding to topics pertaining to STO, moved this page from Dynassia, and the Iconians feature heavily in that game, maybe he can confirm whether or not the current spelling is used there? And I have no idea where the original spelling variation comes from. In any case, I went ahead and changed the spelling for both planet and people throughout this article to the one currently used as the page name. However, I will hold off on changing it on any related page until this issue is resolved. - Bell'Orso (talk) 06:08, October 3, 2015 (UTC) :The script for Contagion spells the name of their language as "Dinasian", and while The Devils Heart cribbed from the episode, it used more stylized spellings of the three language names including "Dynasian" and calls the location "Dynasia". Finally STO probably refers to the language and people as "Dynassian". :It could be expected the canon truth of the matter is the "Dinasia" spelling for the location, but the location was never mentioned in canon, just the derived language name which is logically expected to be the species name. :So the earlier novel and current game both have their own stylized spelling of a place never mentioned in canon, both can be considered to be equally valid. I'd suggest the place's article reside at the earlier, novel spelling. And that the newer STO spelling should redirect to it, based purely on it being a newer source. -- Captain MKB 06:54, October 3, 2015 (UTC) ::Well then, personally I would keep the location at its current spelling, even though the canon source is for the language, and derive the names for the people and language from that. The reasoning being that, however the planet was named, it was likely named first, then the people were named after the planet and the language after the people. Just like a Vulcan from Vulcan speaks Vulcan (and God only knows how many other languages, damn those sweaty try-hards) - Bell'Orso (talk) 08:12, October 3, 2015 (UTC) :The problem is that the spelling "Dinasia" for the place has not been used in any canon source nor do we have a licensed publication that uses that spelling. :Using this for the article title would be a complete fabrication with no relevant source, which is against policy. :Plenty of language and cultural names have varied spellings that do not reflect their origin. For example, people from England do not speak Englandian or Englandish, so it follows that we cannot logically conclude that a language called English must come from a place spelled Englia. -- Captain MKB 08:29, October 3, 2015 (UTC) ::I know, I know. It's just so . . . untidy. I really prefer tidy. - Bell'Orso (talk) 09:29, October 3, 2015 (UTC) :It's always unfortunate when there's a hole in our canon sources and published sources -- look how slowly our "unnamed... " article topics grow. But as we distill these sources into usable data for the wiki, it does provide hope that new authors will see these situations as an opportunity to fill blanks -- Captain MKB 16:03, October 3, 2015 (UTC) :::::Final thought: has anyone checked Star Charts to see if they have a system for the Dinasian origin -- Captain MKB 16:04, October 3, 2015 (UTC) Sorry about the confusion guys, I couldn't finish the edit yesterday... Well in TNG Data refers to the planet as Dinasia, and for that reason I think Dinasia should be used as the oficial term. As the Dinasian history is very controverse because of several non canon versions, I decided to make separated contents about the planet's history (STO and TDH) in two different headings. I also know that the three planets are referred as DiWahn, Ikkabar and Dynassia, or Dewa, Iccobar and Dinasia... Dinasia is missing in several star charts I searched by all of them display Iccobar and Dewa as the oficial term for the planets, so if we follow logic Dinasia should be canon as well. - Syk99 (talk) 17:17, October 3, 2015 (UTC) :So first off, you're wrong -- Data never refers to any planet called "Dinasia" in Contagion -- nor does he even refer to any species called "Dinasian" ... He simply mentions the language, Dinasian :The conversation above establishes this i'd suggest you read it before we go further. :To reiterate my last comment, unless we find a source for the spelling of the planet being spelled "Dinasia", the article should NOT be at this location. I am only holding off reverting the move because the conversation with Bell'Orso was left open that there might be other sources. -- Captain MKB 18:42, October 3, 2015 (UTC) If you take a look on how Star Trek refer to a species, we can see that almost all the times the species' language is named after the species' name, like Vulcans speaking the Vulcan language, Iconians speaking the Iconian language, etc... I just used this line of thought to conclude that the Dinasian language must be from the Dinasian species, however I can understand that the first reference to the species was made by TDH, using the term "Dynasian" species and "Dynasia" planet. However there's also the STO version using "Dinasia" and "Dinasian"... As you can see in my edit I maintained both referrences intact, separating them on different headings. Anyway, you have much more experience on how to deal with this sort of thing, so, do as you guys see as the best action. - Syk99 (User talk:Syk99) 18:59, October 3, 2015 (UTC) :Again, i already establshed above that this is not a situation where we would be allowed to come to such a conclusion. We don't formulate our own name for things as a matter of policy here. Unless we find an actual source, we cannot derive our own info because it might fit something you theorize happens "almost all of the time". The article cannot use this name/spelling without a source. -- Captain MKB 19:19, October 3, 2015 (UTC) I see... so, options are between "Dynasia" from TDH or "Dinasia" from STO? The name for the page was "Dynassia" before I changed it, and I couldn't find any source using "Dynassia"... correct me if I'm wrong. - Syk99 (User talk:Syk99) 19:35, October 3, 2015 (UTC) :The move away from an unsourced title was a valid one. Contradictions such as these need information gathering, which is why i flagged the need for Star Charts info if any is available. Besides The Devil's Heart and STO, there may be other versions out there. :Furthermore, i'd support the merger of all articles about this species. The Devil's Heart described little of their physiology and culture, and STO presents them much more explicitly -- but I do not feel these are contradictions, as a species they could share variation and thus not need separate articles, and we should continue to treat them as the same species. -- Captain MKB 19:48, October 3, 2015 (UTC) OK, so let me recap: *planet: called Dinasia in STO (apparently; I don't have the game myself and have to go by secondary sources here, most notably the STO wiki), called Dynasia in TDH, called Dynassia in . . . where exactly? I have yet to find a source for this spelling. Will have to locate a copy of Star Charts. *native people: called Dinasian (read: no "native(s)" suffix) in STO and Dynasian natives in TDH. Again, no source for the as yet undiscussed possible spelling of Dynassian natives. *Iconian refugees: Do they take a different name in STO? Or are they still just called Iconians? Anyway, they are called Dynasians in TDH and once again, no source that I've found gives their name as Dynassians. *language: called Dinasian language in "Contagion". I don't think TDH refers to the language explicitly, but if I were to check again, I'm sure that, if it did, it would refer to it as Dynasian language to remain consistent with itself. Yet again, I could find no source for the third spelling variation possible. Since TDH is the oldest source, I suggest we use its spelling where possible: Dynasia for the planet, Dynasian natives for the native population, Dynasians for the Iconian refugees and finally Dinasian for the language, since canon sources trump all others. All pages would have an "otheruses" template going to a disambiguation page or a "you may be looking for" message at the top to link to the other pages and spelling discrepancy notes inserted into background sections. Thoughts? - Bell'Orso (talk) 19:55, October 3, 2015 (UTC) Understood. Again, sorry if I had difficulties to express exactly what I meant... my English is not very good. So, to finish the discussion, my initial goal was to create a new page: the Dinasian race, as shown in Star Trek Online. When I made some research and didn't find any source using "Dynassia", and as my goal was to focus the edit on Dinasia from STO, which as you said, is more detailed, I chose to change the title to the current one. I agree with Bell'Orso in this matter, and will make the necessary changes if ya both agree... again, sorry about the mess :P - Syk99 (talk) 20:09, October 3, 2015 (UTC) I would like to take the opportunity to discuss the matter about Dewa/'DiWahn' and Iccobar/'Ikkabar'... So, again, I couldn't find any source citing Ikkabar or DiWahn, but there are several Star Charts showing Dewa and Iccobar... The problem is that in STO New Romulus (also Dewa III) is the same planet as this "DiWahn". I think its important to highlight that the person that created the pages "DiWahn", "Ikkabar" and "Dynassia" is the same one. My request for admin was initialy for this specific case, were we have two pages relating to the same planet, but one without any source for the name. Syk99 (talk) 20:43, October 3, 2015 (UTC) :Having checked through TDH again, I can say that the spelling variations DiWahn and Ikkabar (used to describe both the planet and the descendants of Iconian refugees in both cases) originate from there as well. Additionally, there's a reference to unDiWahn, possibly some sort of outcast sect. Will have to actually reread the novel to check on that. :So, by my reckoning, DiWahn (planet) and Ikkabar (planet) should remain at those page names and the Iconian descendants living there would be the DiWahn and Ikkabar. - Bell'Orso (talk) 20:59, October 3, 2015 (UTC) :::For what's it's worth, I checked Star Charts and see the three stars, "Dewa", "Iccobar", and "Dinasia" listed on pages 63 and 67, in a position bordering the Romulan Neutral Zone. They are listed with those spellings and an odd contention that all three are uninhabited systems. Those are the name of the stars though, and I don't think there are anymore references to them in the Star Charts.--Tim Thomason (talk) 01:48, October 4, 2015 (UTC) :::Here's an image showing the locations of Dinasia, Dewa, and Iccobar, relative to one another on Page 63 of the Star Charts. Note that several stars have been deprecated (Archer, Klach D'Kel Brakt), so obviously this isn't a totally unimpeachable source.--Tim Thomason (talk) 15:32, October 5, 2015 (UTC) :Thanks for checking. I think the spelling used in the Star Charts can probably be taken as a good intermediate between STO and The Devil's Heart -- those alternate spellings are from sources not associated with the shows' production (as Star Charts is). Those other sources besides Star Charts should be listed as the alternate spellings -- Captain MKB 05:01, October 6, 2015 (UTC)